I'd never take anything away from the people who do the work, Robert. I've been there. But that's not the point. In Das Kapital Marx demonstrates that the wealthy are wealthy because they've stolen the wealth created by the workers. His logic is close to impeccable. Only problem is that in order to accept his conclusion you have to start with the premise that labor is the only thing that produces value. He never attempts to prove his premise. I'll quote myself from an article I wrote long ago:
"The efficacy of any correct algorithmic process depends on two things: the validity of its premises and the validity of the data fed into it. The premises almost always are unprovable. They are arbitrary perceptions of reality arrived at through a mind leap that suspiciously resembles faith. The data need not only be accurate, they need to measure what the algorithm purports to deal with. Without valid premises and valid data a process may be quite valid and work perfectly well, but at the same time produce garbage.
"Many who claim “scientific” methodology seem utterly uncritical about the premises upon which their methodology is based, and seem unable to distinguish between what can be quantified and what cannot. Most of what these people produce is garbage. Yet, it seems, our society has been taught to accept the results of any methodology provided it’s sufficiently complex and mysterious to hide the question of faith buried in its premises. Process itself has become our religion. Revelation and mathematics have become synonymous.
"Marxism is a good example of this garbage in, garbage out variety of religion. In Das Kapital, Marx started with the premise that value in human terms comes only from human labor. Without questioning the premise, he proceeded to construct a process-oriented explanation for human endeavor which leads, inexorably to the conclusion that profit must come from exploiting the labor of others. His scientifically-arrived-at remedy for this warping of the human condition by capitalism is even more startling than the conclusion itself: that if the state owns the means of production, all will be well!
"No sane Marxist will argue with you about the source of value — any more than a priest will argue with you about the divinity of Christ. Either you accept the premise on faith or you don’t. The difference is that in the first case, if you accept Marx’s premise, everything else can be proven. In the second case, if you accept the divinity of Christ, nothing more need be proven, nor, for that matter, said."
Yes, there are plenty of managers out there who are ruthless and full of blame, often supported and coddled by the government, though if we get into that discussion none of us will get much done for quite a while.
But to paraphrase Churchill: capitalism is the worst economic system there is, except for all the rest.